Stringer v. SIMON & SCHUSTER, INC
- Vyskocil
- 1:25-cv-00670
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Stringer v. SIMON & SCHUSTER, INC, Judge Vyskocil denied Stringer’s default motion without prejudice because the response deadline had not expired.
Vickie M. Stringer’s request for entry of default was denied without prejudice; Simon & Schuster, Inc. was given until June 13, 2025, to answer according to the court’s stated deadline.
What happened
In Stringer v. SIMON & SCHUSTER, INC, Vickie M. Stringer, representing herself, asked the court to enter default against Simon & Schuster, Inc. She argued that the company had been served with her amended complaint but had not responded by May 15, 2025.
The court directed Stringer to review the Marshal’s service record. That record and a standing court order gave the defendant 60 days from mailing or delivering its completed acknowledgment of service to the Marshals Service. The court stated that the defendant’s answer was due June 13, 2025.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil denied Stringer’s motion without prejudice to renewal. The ruling did not decide whether the defendant should ultimately be held in default.
The detailed version
- Stringer v. SIMON & SCHUSTER, INC · No. 1:25-cv-00670
- Vyskocil
- May 28, 2025
Background
Vickie M. Stringer, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) asking the clerk to enter default against Simon & Schuster, Inc. She stated that she filed an amended complaint on February 5, 2025; that the court ordered service through the United States Marshals Service; and that the defendant was served on April 24, 2025. Stringer argued that the defendant’s response was due 21 days after service, on May 15, 2025, and that the defendant had not answered, filed a motion, or otherwise responded.
Court’s Reasoning
The court directed Stringer to review the Marshal’s Process Receipt and Return of Service Executed. The court explained that, under a standing order, the defendant had 60 days from the date it mailed or delivered its completed acknowledgment of receipt of service to the Marshals Service. Based on that procedure, the court stated that the defendant’s answer was due June 13, 2025.
Ruling
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil denied Stringer’s motion for entry of default without prejudice to renewal. The opinion did not decide the merits of Stringer’s claims or determine whether Simon & Schuster, Inc. would ultimately be held in default.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.